Section 7: Vermont Level I Licensure Portfolio€¦ · Section 7: Vermont Level I Licensure...

Section 7: Vermont Level I Licensure Portfolio

I. Overview

Pre-service educators in Vermont Educator Preparation Programs leading to recommendation

for Level I Educator Licensure, use the Vermont Licensure Portfolio (VLP) designed by a

committee comprised of members of the Vermont Council of Teacher Educators (VCTE), the

Vermont Standards Board for Professional Educators (VSBPE) and the Vermont Agency of

Education (AOE).

The VLP is aligned with the Core Teaching standards in the Core Teaching and Leadership

Standards for Vermont Educators and has three Parts which can be completed over the course

of a pre-service educator’s experience in a Vermont Educator Preparation Program. Pre-service

educators will collect evidence of their practice while in their preparation program which

demonstrates proficiency of meeting the Core Teaching Standards. Using the collected

evidence, the pre-service educator constructs a narrative to describe, critically analyze, and

reflect on their performance. The three-part Portfolio is designed to be both formative and

summative:

Part I – The Learner and the Learning - aligns to Core Teaching Standards 1-3 and may

be completed prior to the final Student Teaching or Internship experience (formative)

Part II – Content Knowledge & Instructional Practice – aligns to Standards 4-8 and is

completed during the final Student Teaching or Internship experience (summative)

Part III – Professional Responsibility - aligns to Core Standards 9-10 and is completed

before, during, or after the final Student Teaching or Internship experience (formative or

summative)

All Vermont Educator Preparation Programs are required to follow the VLP directions, rubrics

and scoring guides. Part II has common evidence that all preparation programs will require.

These common elements are: a unit plan, 5 lessons plans, a video of classroom instruction, a

supervisor observation or evaluation of practice, and analysis of student work.

In addition to using the Vermont Licensure Portfolio educator preparation programs are

expected to participate in the VLP Inter-rater reliability process.

http://education.vermont.gov/documents/educator-quality-licensing-core-teaching-leadership-standards



Portfolio Implementation

The roll-out of the Portfolio occurred over the 2015-2016 academic year and allowed for a

transition period for preparation programs to re-design their curriculum so that it aligns with

the Core Teaching Standards and the new Portfolio requirements. Proposed changes, based on

feedback during the pilot year, were approved by the VSBPE in June of 2016. Recommendations

for the state-wide calibration system for the Portfolio, including professional development and

recommendations for system improvements can be made by EPIC for VSBPE review and

approval. Recommendations are to be submitted to the Agency of Education ROPA

Coordinator two weeks prior to a VSBPE scheduled meeting (dates available on the AOE

website). [Underlined text is the language recommended by AOE legal counsel].

Implementation Timeline

o The VLP will apply to entering pre-service educators in undergraduate Educator

Preparation Programs starting in fall 2015. Pre-service educators graduating in the

2018/2019 academic year will all be required to submit the VLP.

o The VLP will apply to entering pre-service educators in all other programs

(graduate, post baccalaureate, alternative) in fall 2016. Professional Development

o Orientation & Calibration (summer & fall 2015)

o Curriculum Mapping (2015-2016)

Evaluation, Calibration and Program Feedback (starting in summer 2015 and ongoing)

o Baseline Evaluation

2015-2016 - Invite all programs to participate in pilot year

implementation, collecting evidence for revision and improvement of the

VLP;

2016-2017 - Invite all programs to participate in review of material related

to the scholarship of educator preparation;

Summer 2017 - Invite all programs to submit random samples of Entry V

(old version) or the VLP Part II;

o Annual Evaluation and Calibration of VLP.

Retention

o 7 years of portfolios for pre-service educators need to be retained for ROPA

reviews.

I. The Vermont Licensure Portfolio

Part I - The Learner and Learning

Part I of the Portfolio assesses a candidate’s readiness to design learning experiences based on

an understanding of learning and learners. The emphasis of Part I is on the design of learning

experiences. Candidates demonstrate their ability to examine, analyze, and reflect on designing

learning experiences in a variety of settings with diverse learners. Evidence for Part I should

demonstrate the ability to design learning experiences using learning theory and knowledge of

learner differences.

Part I is intended to be a formative learning experience where candidates should complete Part I

prior to their final Student Teaching or Internship placement. The language of the Performance

(Criterion (based on the Core Teaching and Leadership Standards for Vermont Educators) has

been modified to guide an assessment of candidates early in an Educator Preparation Program.

Programs should create a curriculum guide that will assist candidates and determine which

resources, tasks, experiences, or assignment provide the best opportunities to gather evidence

for the Performance Criterion. Programs may find it helpful to align specific Performance

Criterion to assignments. Evidence for Part I can be gathered from coursework or fieldwork.

Fieldwork can be through practicum experiences such as tutoring or community-based work

with youth.

Programs should establish an implementation, submission, and review process that aligns with

its curriculum. Programs may decide to have candidates complete the Part I narrative after

collecting all of the Part I evidence, or they may decide to have candidates complete multiple

narratives for Part I across various courses. Other variations may considered.

When candidates submit Portfolio components, each submission should include (1) the

associated evidence, (2) the Evidence Chart, and (3) a narrative with sections titled Description,

Analysis, and Reflection.

Programs should develop a consistent system for the assessment of Part I, including a scoring

and feedback timeline, and a record-keeping system. Portfolio scorers must receive instructions

for the use of the rubrics.

Programs should maintain copies of all Part I submissions with accompanying Scoring

Reports for future program review. These can be anonymous. Programs should conduct

regular reviews of Part I material for program assessment and improvement.

The documents attached in Appendix I provide details to complete Part I.

Part II - Content Knowledge and Instructional Practice

Part II of the Portfolio assesses a candidate’s readiness to implement effective instructional

practices. The emphasis of Part II is implementation. Candidates demonstrate their ability to

thoughtfully examine, critically analyze, and skillfully reflect upon their use of assessment,

planning, and instructional practices to implement creative, rigorous, and engaging learning in

a content area. A candidate’s evidence for Part II should demonstrate the ability to implement

instruction using a formal understanding of assessment, planning, instruction, and inquiry into

such instructional practice.

Part II is intended to be a summative learning assessment. Candidates should complete Part II

during their final Student Teaching or Internship placement. The language of the Performance

Criterion (based on the Core Teaching Standards in the Core Teaching and Leadership


Standards for Vermont Educators) has been modified to guide an assessment of the

candidate's performance during the later stage of an Educator Preparation Program.

Programs should create a curriculum guide that will help candidates determine which

resources, tasks, experiences, or assignments will provide the best opportunities to gather

evidence for the Performance Criterion. Programs may find it helpful to align specific

Performance Criterion to particular assignments. Specific evidence is required for Part II, which

must be from material the candidate implemented during the final Student Teaching or

Internship experience. The required evidence for Part II includes:

1. A unit of study that contains at least five lessons and is representative of a candidate’s

endorsement area(s) with an indication of how instruction will accommodate a range of

learners and students with special needs;

2. 12-15 minutes of video (continuous or in clips) of the candidate providing instruction

during the Student Teaching or Internship phase of the program, with accompanying

annotations regarding the candidate’s teaching practice;

3. A supervisor’s observation or evaluation of the candidate’s teaching practice;

4. An analysis of samples of a student's work over time (multiple samples of one student)

or samples of multiple students drawn from the unit of study.


the curriculum of the program.

When candidates submit Part II, that submission should include (1) the associated evidence, (2)

the Evidence Chart, and (3) a narrative composed of sections titled Description, Analysis, and

Reflection. Programs should develop a consistent system for the assessment of Part II, including

a scoring and feedback timeline, and a record-keeping system. Portfolio scorers must receive

instructions for the use of the rubrics.

Programs should maintain copies of Part II submissions with accompanying Scoring Reports for

future review. These can be anonymous. Programs should conduct regular reviews of Part II

material for program assessment and improvement.

The documents attached in Appendix I provide details for completing Part II.

Part III - Professional Responsibility

Part III of the Portfolio assesses a candidate’s readiness to ensure professional responsibility.

The emphasis of Part III is professional manner. Candidates demonstrate the ability to examine,

analyze, and reflect upon their readiness for professional responsibility. A candidate’s evidence

for Part III should demonstrate the ability to improve practice and advance the profession by

using data, ethical analysis, and guided reflection.


Part III is intended to be an ongoing learning assessment. Candidates may complete Part III

before, during, and/or after their final Student Teaching or Internship experience. The language

of the Performance Criterion (based on the Core Teaching Standards in the Core Teaching and

Leadership Standards for Vermont Educators) has been modified to guide an assessment of

candidates throughout the preparation program.

Programs should create a curriculum guide that will help candidates determine which

resources, tasks, experiences, or assignments will provide the best opportunities to gather

evidence for the Performance Criterion. Programs may find it helpful to align specific

Performance Criterion to particular assignments. Evidence for Part III can be gathered from

coursework or fieldwork assignments. Fieldwork can be through practicum experiences such as

the Student Teaching or Internship experience or community-based work.


the curriculum of their program.

When candidates submit Portfolio components, each submission should include (1) the

associated evidence, (2) the Evidence Chart, and (3) a narrative with sections titled Description,

Analysis, and Reflection. As well, programs should develop a consistent system for the

assessment of Part III, including a scoring and feedback timeline, and a record-keeping system.

All individuals scoring the portfolio must receive instructions for the use of the rubrics.

Programs should maintain copies of Part III submissions with accompanying Scoring Reports

for future review. Programs should conduct regular reviews of Part III material for program

assessment and improvement. Part III material may be requested for EPIC reviews.

The documents in Appendix I provide details for completing Part III.



Section 8: ROPA Fees

In 2016, H.872 (see: http://legislature.vermont.gov/assets/Documents/2016/Docs/BILLS/H-0872/H-

0872%20As%20Introduced.pdf) was passed to allow the ROPA program to continue through the

collection of fees.

The following fees were approved:

Annual Authority to Recommend Licensure $1000/year

Annual Program Review Fee (based on Title II Report) $25/program completer

Site Visit Fee (for full visit) $1500

Two Year Report Fee $ 500

New Program Initiation Fee $2000

The fees are collected according to the following schedule:

Fee Name Date Action

Annual Authority to Recommend Licensure November Invoiced by AOE

Annual Program Review December Invoiced by AOE

Site Visit 30-60 days prior

to scheduled visit

Invoiced by AOE

Two Year Report

New Program Initiation Open year round Institution submits to

AOE with application

materials

Note that the fee legislation states that:

“(v) Visit. Colleges, universities, and other educator preparation programs shall pay a fee of

$1,500.00 for the travel, lodging, and meal expenses of the review team. If a program chooses to

have a review team chair travel from outside the State under Vermont State Board of Professional

Educators (VSBPE) Policy N2, the program is responsible for all additional expenses in excess of

$1,500.00.”

The VSBPE Policy N5 states that:

“For full program reviews the Chair must be a:member of the professional teacher-education

community from out-of-state whose travel expenses for visits and training will be directly paid by

the site under review OR 2. member of the professional teacher-education community from

http://legislature.vermont.gov/assets/Documents/2016/Docs/BILLS/H-0872/H-0872%20As%20Introduced.pdf

http://legislature.vermont.gov/assets/Documents/2016/Docs/BILLS/H-0872/H-0872%20As%20Introduced.pdf

Vermont with visiting experience on a regional or national accrediting body whose travel expenses

for visits and training will be directly paid by the AOE.”

Past practice on ROPA visits has used out-of-state chairs from neighboring states, but paying

mileage at the federal rate can increase visit costs significantly since the team chair comes to

Vermont for training, and then returns for the visit (2 round-trips).

Appendix I – Vermont Licensure Portfolio Documents

Vermont Licensure Portfolio

DIRECTIONS Overview: The Vermont Licensure Portfolio (VLP) consists of three parts that align with the Vermont Core Teaching

Standards (VCTS), which are based on the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC)

Model Core Standards and Learning Progressions 1.0. Part I: The Learner and Learning - Candidates demonstrate their ability to thoughtfully examine, critically

analyze, and insightfully reflect upon their readiness to use an understanding of learning theory, learner

development, and learner differences for the design of effective learning experiences in a variety of settings

with diverse learners. Standard 1: Learner Development – The teacher understands how learners grow and develop, recognizing that

patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social,

emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning

experiences. Performance Criterion 1.1: Candidates use understanding of learning theory (in areas such as cognitive, linguistic, social emotional and physical) to design appropriate learning experiences. Performance Criterion 1.2: Candidates use understanding of developmental theory (in areas such as cognitive, linguistic, social emotional and physical) to design appropriate learning experiences.

Standard 2: Learning Differences – The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse

cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high

standards. Performance Criterion 2.1: Candidates use an understanding of individual differences to design inclusive learning experiences. Performance Criterion 2.2: Candidates use an understanding of diverse cultures and communities to design inclusive learning experiences.

Standard 3: Learning Environments – The teacher works with others to create environments that support

individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in

learning, and self motivation. Performance Criterion 3.1: Candidates design learning environments that support individual learning marked by active engagement. Performance Criterion 3.2: Candidates design learning environments that support collaborative learning marked by positive social interaction.

Part II: Content Knowledge and Instructional Practice - Candidates demonstrate the ability to thoughtfully

examine, critically analyze, and insightfully reflect upon the use of content knowledge and assessment, planning,

and instructional strategies to implement creative, rigorous, and engaging learning. Standard 4: Content Knowledge and Pedagogical Content Knowledge – The teacher understands the central

concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) [they] teaches and creates learning experiences that

make these aspects of the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of content.

Performance Criterion 4.1: Candidates accurately communicate central concepts of the discipline. Performance Criterion 4.2: Candidates accurately address common misconceptions of the discipline.

Standard 5: Application of Content for Transferable Skills – The teacher understands how to connect concepts

and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving

related to authentic local and global issues. Performance Criterion 5.1: Candidates engage learners in applying perspectives from varied disciplines in

authentic contexts (such as local and global issues). Performance Criterion 5.2: Candidates integrate cross-disciplinary skills (such as critical thinking,

creativity, and collaborative problem solving) to help learners demonstrate their learning in unique ways. Standard 6: Assessment – The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners

in their own growth, to monitor learning progress, and to guide the teacher’s and learner’s decision making. Performance Criterion 6.1: Candidates implement multiple methods of assessment to monitor learner

progress to inform instructional practice. Performance Criterion 6.2: Candidates analyze an individual student’s work over time using multiple

methods of assessment to adjust instruction. Standard 7: Planning for Instruction – The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting

rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and

pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context. Performance Criterion 7.1: Candidates plan instruction by drawing upon knowledge of content areas to

meet rigorous learning goals. Performance Criterion 7.2: Candidates plan instruction by drawing upon knowledge of learners to meet

rigorous learning goals.

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies – The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to

encourage learners to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to

apply knowledge in meaningful ways. Performance Criterion 8.1: Candidates use a variety of instructional strategies to make the discipline

accessible for diverse learners. Performance Criterion 8.2: Candidates use a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to

build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways.

Part III: Professional Responsibility - Candidates demonstrate their ability to thoughtfully examine, critically

analyze, and insightfully reflect upon their readiness for professional responsibility. Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice – The teacher engages in ongoing professional

learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate [their] practice, particularly the effects of [their] choices and

actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the

needs of each learner. Performance Criterion 9.1: Candidates are prepared for self-directed, continuous professional learning. Performance Criterion 9.2: Candidates are prepared to practice in a legal and ethical manner.

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration – The teacher seeks appropriate leadership roles and opportunities

to take responsibility for student learning, to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues, other school

professionals, and community members to ensure learner growth and to advance the profession. Performance Criterion 10.1: Candidates are prepared to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues,

other school professionals, and community members to ensure student learning. Performance Criterion 10.2: Candidates are prepared to advance the profession through advocacy,

leadership and/or action research.

Components: Each Part includes an Evidence Chart and a Narrative. Evidence: See the Evidence Chart for directions on identifying evidence and connecting this evidence to the Performance

Criteria listed above. Parts I and III do not have specific required evidence. Part II has required evidence. Each piece of required evidence must be aligned with a Performance Criterion.

However, the required evidence does not have to be the evidence selected for analysis in the narrative. Educator

Preparation Programs (EPPs) may align this required evidence with Performance Criteria in their individual

programs. The required evidence for Part II includes:

1. A unit of study that contains at least five lessons and is representative of a candidate’s endorsement area(s),

with an indication of how instruction will accommodate a range of learners and students with special

needs;

2. 12-15 minutes of video (continuous or in clips) of the candidate providing instruction during the Student

Teaching or Internship phase of the program, with accompanying annotations regarding the candidate’s

teaching practice;

3. A supervisor’s observation or evaluation of the candidate’s teaching practice;

4. An analysis of samples of a student's work over time (multiple samples of one student) or samples of

multiple students drawn from the unit of study.

Narrative: For the narrative for each Part, you are to demonstrate your ability to use three types of writing: description,

analysis, and reflection. In a formally written and structured report, concisely address the three components listed

below. Your narrative must adhere to common standards for academic writing including grammar, usage, and

mechanics (see the VT State Rubric for Writing Conventions), format (headings, spacing, pagination, etc.), and

style (citations, quotes, and references). As a report of your professional performance, it is acceptable to use first

person and active voice. Use pseudonyms throughout. Describe

The purpose of the Description is to establish a meaningful context for your narrative. The description includes

two elements, which can be addressed in either order:

1. Part Theme – Interpret the meaning of the theme (e.g. Part I: The Learner and Learning--What does the

theme mean to you?). Address the theme holistically. You do not have to include connections to literature

but can do so it if helps you examine the theme.

2. Evidence – Describe the context (setting and situation) where you collected evidence and explain how the

body of evidence helped you make meaning of the theme.

Analyze

The purpose of the Analysis is to demonstrate your ability to critically evaluate your performance as an emerging

professional. To do so, you will construct a critical evaluation of your achievement of one Performance Criterion

for each standard. You will write 10 analyses in total (3 for Part I, 5 for Part II, and 2 for Part III). This narrative

should use four elements to analyze a Performance Criterion.

1. Performance Criterion – Explicitly interpret the features of the Performance Criterion.

2. Literature/Theoretical Framework – Use educational literature or program mission/theoretical framework

to support your interpretation of the performance criterion. The program mission or theoretical framework

can also include the mission or theoretical framework of the institution in which you completed fieldwork.

3. Salient Evidence – Select 1-2 pieces of salient evidence from the Evidence Chart for the chosen

Performance Criterion. Articulate how your evidence connects to the Performance Criterion and the

literature/program mission/theoretical framework. Throughout your analysis you should make

explicit/direct connections to your evidence.

4. Critical Self-Evaluation – Use the Performance Criterion, literature, and salient evidence to evaluate how

well and to what degree you achieved the Performance Criterion. Base your self-evaluation on the

correspondence between the performance criterion, the educational literature (or program

mission/theoretical framework) and your evidence (see diagram below).

Reflect The purpose of the Reflection is to review your learning and identify areas for continued growth. The Reflection

includes two elements:

1. Review of your personal learning – Examine specific incidents and points of learning related to the theme

of the Part (e.g. Part I: The Learner and Learning), reconsider long-standing perceptions that were

challenged or affirmed.

2. Plan for ongoing learning – Conceptualize ideas for ongoing growth in this area.

Scoring: Each Part will be assessed using the rubric and score report for that Part. In order to earn a PASS on any Part, the

majority of scored items must achieve the targets listed in the third column, none can be scored in the first column. Two qualified reviewers will score each Part of the portfolio independently. Reviewers will discuss split outcomes

and determine the need for a third reviewer. In order to pass the portfolio, candidates must pass each Part in a

reasonable amount of time, as determined by the Educator Preparation Program.

Vermont Licensure Portfolio Evidence Chart

Directions

Over the span of your preparation program, as you complete course and fieldwork assignments, you will collect evidence of your performance and

align the evidence to Performance Criteria of the Core Teaching Standards for Vermont Educators. The evidence demonstrates your performance of a

specific Performance Criterion. Potential evidence (e.g. lesson plans, videos of teaching performance) for each Performance Criterion may be

identified through the Educator Preparation Program materials or course syllabi.

This Evidence Chart is a mechanism for you to collect and curate your evidence that aligns with specific Performance Criterion. It is encouraged that

you use an electronic platform for the evidence chart. You will collect evidence by title, which is hyperlinked to the evidence, and linked or tagged to

a specific Performance Criterion. Each Performance Criterion must have at least one piece of evidence but may have many. One piece of evidence

may address multiple Performance Criteria. Collate and organize all evidence cited in the evidence chart. For each piece of evidence, a rationale must

be written to explain how the evidence demonstrates the Performance Criterion (2 or 3 sentences).

When you submit a Narrative for Part I, II, or III, you will provide the reviewer with access to all of your collected evidence for the Performance

Criteria of that specific Narrative. Use your Evidence Chart as a cover page. The reviewer will check your evidence chart to observe the connection

between your evidence and a specific Performance Criterion. A clear rationale makes this review more efficient.

Candidate: Submission

Date:

Program: Advisor:

Reviewer

1: Review Date:

Reviewer

2: Review Date:

Part I: The Learner and Learning

Standard Performance Criterion Evidence & Rationale

Standard I: Learner

Development

The teacher understands how

learners grow and develop,

recognizing that patterns of

learning and development vary

individually within and across the

cognitive, linguistic, social,

emotional, and physical areas, and

designs and implements

developmentally appropriate and

challenging learning experiences.

PC 1.1 Candidates use understanding of

learning theory (in areas such as cognitive,

linguistic, social emotional and physical) to

design appropriate learning experiences.

PC 1.2 Candidates use understanding of

developmental theory (in areas such as

cognitive, linguistic, social emotional and

physical) to design appropriate learning

experiences.

Standard 2: Learning

Differences

PC 2.1 Candidates use an understanding of

individual differences to design inclusive

learning experiences.

The teacher uses understanding of

individual differences and diverse

cultures and communities to

ensure inclusive learning

environments that enable each

learner to meet high standards.

PC 2.2 Candidates use an understanding of

diverse cultures and communities to design

inclusive learning experiences.

Standard 3: Learning

Environments

The teacher works with others to

create environments that support

individual and collaborative

learning, and that encourage

positive social interaction, active

engagement in learning, and self-

motivation.

PC 3.1 Candidates design learning

environments that support individual

learning marked by active engagement.

PC 3.2 Candidates design learning

environments that support collaborative

learning marked by positive social

interaction.

Part II: Content Knowledge and Instructional Practice


Standard 4: Content Knowledge

The teacher understands the

central concepts, tools of inquiry,

and structures of the discipline(s)

he or she teaches and creates

learning experiences that make the

discipline accessible and

meaningful for learners to assure

mastery of the content.

PC 4.1 Candidates accurately communicate

central concepts of the discipline.

PC 4.2 Candidates accurately address

common misconceptions of the discipline.

Standard 5: Application of

Content

PC 5.1 Candidates engage learners in

applying perspectives from varied

disciplines in authentic contexts (such as

local and global issues).

The teacher understands how to

connect concepts and use differing

perspectives to engage learners in

critical thinking, creativity, and

collaborative problem solving

related to authentic local and

global issues.

PC 5.2 Candidates integrate cross-

disciplinary skills (such as critical thinking,

creativity, and collaborative problem

solving) to help learners demonstrate their

learning in unique ways.

Standard 6: Assessment

The teacher understands and uses

multiple methods of assessment to

engage learners in their own

growth, to monitor learner

progress, and to guide the

teacher’s and learner’s decision

making.

PC 6.1 Candidates implement multiple

methods of assessment to monitor learner

progress to inform instructional practice.

PC 6.2 Candidates analyze an individual

student’s work over time using multiple

methods of assessment to adjust instruction.

Standard 7: Planning for

Instruction

The teacher plans instruction that

supports every student in meeting

rigorous learning goals by

drawing upon knowledge of

content areas, curriculum, cross-

disciplinary skills, and pedagogy,

as well as knowledge of learners

and the community context.

PC 7.1 Candidates plan instruction by

drawing upon knowledge of content areas to

meet rigorous learning goals.

PC 7.2 Candidates plan instruction by

drawing upon knowledge of learners to meet

rigorous learning goals.

Standard 8: Instructional

Strategies

The teacher understands and uses

a variety of instructional strategies

8.1 Candidates use a variety of instructional

strategies to make the discipline accessible

for diverse learners

to encourage learners to develop

deep understanding of content

areas and their connections, and to

build skills to apply knowledge in

meaningful ways.

8.2 Candidates use a variety of instructional

strategies to encourage learners to build

skills to apply knowledge in meaningful

ways.

Part III: Professional Responsibility


Standard 9: Professional

Learning and Ethical Practice

The teacher engages in ongoing

professional learning and uses

evidence to continually evaluate

his/her practice, particularly the

effects of his/her choices and

actions on others (learners,

families, other professionals, and

the community), and adapts

practice to meet the needs of each

learner.

PC 9.1 Candidates are prepared for self-

directed, continuous professional learning.

PC 9.2 Candidates are prepared to practice

in a legal and ethical manner.

Standard 10: Leadership and

Collaboration

The teacher seeks appropriate

leadership roles and opportunities

to take responsibility for student

learning, to collaborate with

learners, families, colleagues,

other school professionals, and

community members to ensure

learner growth, and to advance the

profession.

PC 10.1 Candidates are prepared to

collaborate with learners, families,

colleagues, other school professionals, and

community members to ensure student

learning.

PC 10.2 Candidates are prepared to advance

the profession through advocacy, leadership

and/or action research.

Rubric and Scoring Report: Part I


Revised 07/08/2016

.

Candidate: ____________________________________________ Date Submitted: ______________

Institution & Program: _______________________________________________________________

Advisor: ______________________________________ Email: ______________________________

Reviewer: ____________________________________ Score: ______________________________

The Learner and Learning Theme: Candidates demonstrate their ability to thoughtfully examine, critically

analyze, and insightfully reflect upon their readiness to use an understanding of learning theory, learner

development, and learner differences for the design of effective learning experiences in a variety of settings

with diverse learners.

Required Evidence Present Notes

Evidence Chart

Writing Review Suitable Notes

Writing Mechanics (Proper use of grammar,

usage, and/or mechanics. Professional use of

grammar and vocabulary.)

Clarity of Expression (Ideas are clearly

presented in a sophisticated style suitable to

general academic audiences.)

Organization (Writing is well-organized.

Sources are utilized to enrich the reflection

offering connections and extensions. Sources

are accurately cited. )

Academic Style (In accordance with

academic style guide. Citations and

references are used properly. Wording is free

of bias. Plagiarism is avoided.)

1 2 3

Description

The description

demonstrates

misinterpretation of the

Theme or employs

insufficient details of

context.

The description

demonstrates the

candidate’s ability to

discuss the Theme,

recalling aspects of the

context for evidence

collection.

The description demonstrates the

candidate’s ability to illuminate the

Theme through a depiction of one’s

experience collecting evidence within

particular contexts.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance Criterion

1.1: Candidates use an

understanding of

learning theory (in areas

such as cognitive,

linguistic, social,

emotional and physical)

to design appropriate


The analysis demonstrates

misunderstanding of learning

theory or the development of

appropriate learning

experiences.

The analysis reveals

unexplored suppositions about

the Performance Criterion,

uses insubstantial or

inappropriate literature, notes

irrelevant evidence, and/or

overstates the candidate’s

effectiveness, reiterating

conventional notions.

The analysis demonstrates the

candidate’s ability to reference

learning theory to select and

apply learning experiences.

The analysis reiterates the

Performance Criterion,

references related literature,

program mission or conceptual

framework, identifies

evidence, and remarks on the

candidate’s effectiveness,

providing basic description

and commentary.


candidate’s ability to use an

understanding of learning theory to

design and assess appropriate learning

experiences.

The analysis constructs a perception of

the Performance Criterion with

grounding in appropriate literature,


framework, is enhanced by salient

evidence, and critically evaluates the

candidate’s effectiveness, while

generating ideas, questions, or

proposals.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 1.2: Candidates use an

understanding of

development theory

(in areas such as

cognitive, linguistic,

social, emotional and

physical) to design

appropriate learning

experiences.


misunderstanding of

learning theory or the

development of appropriate



unexplored suppositions

about the Performance

Criterion, uses insubstantial

or inappropriate literature,

notes irrelevant evidence,

and/or overstates the


reiterating conventional

notions.


the candidate’s ability to

reference development

theory to select and apply





program mission or

conceptual framework,

identifies evidence, and

remarks on the candidate’s

effectiveness, providing

basic description and

commentary.

The analysis demonstrates the candidate’s

ability to use an understanding of development

theory to design and assess appropriate


The analysis constructs a perception of the

Performance Criterion with grounding in

appropriate literature, program mission or

conceptual framework, is enhanced by salient


candidate’s effectiveness, while generating

ideas, questions, or proposals.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 2.1: Candidates use

an understanding

of individual

differences to

design inclusive

learning

experiences.


misunderstanding of how

learning experience should be

altered to accommodate

learner differences.










notions.



acknowledge general learner

difference to select and apply






framework, identifies evidence,

and remarks on the candidate’s

effectiveness, providing basic

description and commentary.


ability to use an understanding of particular

individual differences to design and assess

inclusive learning experiences.








Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance


an

understanding

of diverse

cultures and

communities to

design inclusive

learning

experiences.


misunderstanding of how

learning experience should be

altered to accommodate culture

and community.

The analysis reveals unexplored

suppositions about the

Performance Criterion, uses

insubstantial or inappropriate

literature, notes irrelevant

evidence, and/or overstates the


reiterating conventional notions.



acknowledge cultural or

community features to select

and apply learning experiences.










ability to use an understanding of diverse

cultures and communities to design and

assess inclusive learning experiences.




conceptual framework, is enhanced by

salient evidence, and critically evaluates the



Comments:

Score: ___________

Additional Comments

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 3.1: Candidates

design learning

environments

that support

individual

learning marked

by active

engagement.


misunderstanding of how to

use individualized learning

for diverse learners.










notions.


candidate’s ability to select and

apply learning opportunities for

individual learners.










ability to design and assess learning

environments that support individual learning

marked by active engagement.








Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 3.2:

Candidates

design learning

environments

that support

collaborative

learning marked

by positive social

interaction.



use collaborative learning for

diverse learners.










notions.


candidate’s ability to select and

apply collaborative-learning

opportunities.










ability to design and assess learning

environments that support collaborative

learning marked by positive social interaction.








Comments:

Score: ___________

Self-Reflection

The reflection demonstrates

insufficient discussion of

learning drawn from specific

incidents and/or ideas for

ongoing development.

The reflection demonstrates the

candidate’s ability to recount

incidents, recognize personal

beliefs, and identify actions for

additional learning.

The reflection demonstrates the candidate’s

ability to consider specific incidents, rethink

long-standing personal perceptions, and

conceptualize a vision for ongoing growth in

this area.

Comments:

Score: ___________

…..

Rubric and Scoring Report: Part II


Revised 07/08/2016

Candidate: ____________________________________________ Date Submitted: _______________

Institution & Program: ________________________________________________________________

Advisor: ______________________________________ Email: ______________________________

Reviewer: _____________________________________ Score: _____________________________

Content Knowledge & Instructional Practice Theme: Candidates demonstrate the ability to thoughtfully

examine, critically analyze, and insightfully reflect upon the use of content knowledge and assessment,

planning, and instructional strategies to implement creative, rigorous, and engaging learning.


A unit of study that contains at least five

lessons and is representative of a candidate’s

endorsement area(s), with an indication of

how instruction will accommodate a range of

learners and students with special needs;

12-15 minutes of video (continuous or in

clips) of the candidate providing instruction

during the Student Teaching or Internship

phase of the program, with accompanying

annotations regarding the candidate’s

teaching practice;

A supervisor’s observation or evaluation of

the candidate’s teaching practice;

An analysis of samples of a student's work

over time (multiple samples of one student) or

samples of multiple students drawn from the

unit of study.

Evidence Chart











are accurately cited. )


academic style guide. Citations and references

are used properly. Wording is free of bias.

Plagiarism is avoided.)

1 2 3

Description

The description demonstrates

misinterpretation of the Theme or

employs insufficient details of

context.

The description

demonstrates the


discuss the Theme,

recalling aspects of the

context for evidence

collection.

The description demonstrates the candidate’s

ability to illuminate the Theme through a

depiction of one’s experience collecting

evidence within particular contexts.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance


accurately

communicate

central concepts of

their discipline.


misunderstanding of the

central concepts of the

discipline.











candidate’s ability to select

and implement the central

concepts of the discipline.









and commentary.


ability to communicate original and detailed

conceptions of the central concepts of the

discipline.








Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance


accurately address

common

misconceptions of

the discipline.



identify or manage

misconceptions of the

discipline.











candidate’s ability to identify

and correct misconceptions

from the discipline.









and commentary.


ability to anticipate or uncover misconceptions

and redirect understanding with models from

the discipline.








Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 5.1: Candidates engage

learners in

applying

perspectives from

varied disciplines

in authentic

contexts (such as

local and global

issues).


misunderstanding of an

interdisciplinary approach

and/or how to employ inquiry-

based learning.











candidate’s ability to use

various perspectives to expose

learners to local and global

issues.









and commentary.


ability to engage learners in applying

perspectives from varied disciplines in

authentic contexts.








Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 5.2: Candidates integrate

cross-disciplinary

skills (such as critical

thinking, creativity,

and collaborative

problem solving) to

help learners

demonstrate their

learning in unique

ways.


misunderstanding of cross-

disciplinary thinking.










notions.



expose learners to cross-

disciplinary thinking.




program mission or




effectiveness, providing

basic description and

commentary.

The analysis demonstrates the candidate’s ability

to integrate cross-disciplinary skills to help

learners demonstrate their learning in unique

ways.





evidence, and critically evaluates the candidate’s

effectiveness, while generating ideas, questions,

or proposals.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance


implement

multiple methods

of assessment to

monitor learner

progress to

inform

instructional

practice.


misunderstanding or

misapplication of assessment

as a tool for directing

instruction.










notions.



assessment to understand learner

progress.










ability to implement multiple methods of

assessment to monitor learner progress to

inform instructional practice.








Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance


analyze an

individual

learner’s work

over time using

multiple

methods of

assessment to

adjust

instruction.


misunderstanding or

misapplication of individual

assessment strategies to adjust

instruction.

The analysis reveals unexplored

suppositions about the

Performance Criterion, uses

insubstantial or inappropriate

literature, notes irrelevant

evidence, and/or overstates the


reiterating conventional notions.



assessment to guide individual

learning.










ability to analyze an individual learner’s work

over time using multiple methods of

assessment to adjust instruction.








Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 7.1: Candidates plan

instruction by

drawing upon

knowledge of

content areas to

meet rigorous

learning goals.


misunderstanding of planning

instruction for developing

content knowledge.










notions.


candidate’s ability to plan

instruction using content

standards.










to plan instruction using thorough knowledge of

content to enable learners to achieve rigorous

learning goals.







or proposals.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 7.2:

Candidates plan

instruction by

drawing upon

knowledge of

learners to meet

rigorous learning

goals.


misunderstanding of planning

instruction based on

knowledge of learners.










notions.


candidate’s ability to plan

instruction based on learner

interest.










to plan instruction using broad knowledge of

learners to achieve rigorous learning goals.







or proposals.

Comments:

Score: __________

Additional Comments:

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 8.1: Candidates use a

variety of

instructional

strategies to

make the

discipline

accessible for

diverse learners.


misunderstanding of

effective instruction for

diverse learners.










notions.



different instructional

approaches.










to use a variety of instructional strategies to make

the discipline accessible for diverse learners.







or proposals..

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance


a variety of

instructional

strategies to

encourage

learners to build

skills to apply

knowledge in

meaningful

ways.


misunderstanding of effective

instruction for building skills

in the application of content.










notions.


candidate’s ability to discuss

different instructional strategies.










to use a variety of instructional strategies to

encourage learners to build skills to apply

knowledge in meaningful ways.







or proposals.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Self-Reflection



learning drawn from specific

incidents and/or ideas for

ongoing development.

The reflection

demonstrates the


recount incidents,

recognize personal

beliefs, and identify

actions for additional

learning.


ability to consider specific incidents, rethink

long-standing personal perceptions, and

conceptualize a vision for ongoing growth in

this area.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Rubric and Scoring Report: Part III


Revised 07/08/2016

Candidate: ______________________________________________ Date Submitted: _____________

Institution & Program: ________________________________________________________________

Advisor: ______________________________________ Email: ______________________________

Reviewer: _____________________________________ Score: ______________________________

Professional Responsibility Theme: Candidates demonstrate their ability to thoughtfully examine, critically

analyze, and insightfully reflect upon their readiness for professional responsibility.


Evidence Chart











are accurately cited.)


academic style guide. Citations and

references are used properly. Wording is free

of bias. Plagiarism is avoided.)

1 2 3

Description

The description

demonstrates

misinterpretation of the

Theme or employs

insufficient details of

context.

The description demonstrates


discuss the Theme, recalling

aspects of the context for

evidence collection.

The description demonstrates the candidate’s

ability to illuminate the Theme through a

depiction of one’s experience collecting evidence

within particular contexts.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 9.1: Candidates are

prepared for

self-directed,

continuous

professional

learning.


misunderstanding of self-

directed professional

learning.










notions.


candidate’s ability to identify

options for professional

learning.




program mission or







to devise and enact opportunities for self-directed

learning toward professional ends.







or proposals.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance


prepared to

practice in a

legal and

ethical manner.



use legal or ethical

principles of the profession.










notions.



professional codes or legal

statutes to discuss professional

situations.









and commentary.


to deliberate and judge professional dilemmas

using ethical perspectives, legal standings, and

standards of practice.







or proposals.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance

Criterion 10.1:

Candidates are

prepared to

collaborate with

learners,

families,

colleagues,

other school

professionals,

and community

members to

ensure student

learning.


misunderstanding of

collaboration to ensure

student learning.










notions.


candidate’s ability to converse

with learners, families,

colleagues, other school

professionals, and community

members regarding topics

related to student learning.








providing basic description and

commentary.


to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues,

other school professionals, and community

members to ensure student learning.







or proposals.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Analysis of

Performance


prepared to

advance the

profession

through

advocacy,

leadership

and/or action

research.


misunderstanding of

preparation to advance the

profession through

advocacy, leadership and/or

action research.










notions.


candidate’s ability to describe

means for advancing the

profession.




program mission or







preparation to advance the profession through

advocacy, leadership and/or action research.







or proposals.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Self-Reflection



learning drawn from

specific incidents and/or

ideas for ongoing

development.



recount incidents, recognize

personal beliefs, and identify

actions for additional learning.


ability to consider specific incidents, rethink long-

standing personal perceptions, and conceptualize

a vision for ongoing growth in this area.

Comments:

Score: ___________

Section 7: Vermont Level I Licensure Portfolio€¦ · Section 7: Vermont Level I Licensure...

Documents

Transcript of Section 7: Vermont Level I Licensure Portfolio€¦ · Section 7: Vermont Level I Licensure...